{"markup":"\u003C?xml version=\u00221.0\u0022 encoding=\u0022UTF-8\u0022 ?\u003E\n \u003Chtml version=\u0022HTML+RDFa+MathML 1.1\u0022\n xmlns:content=\u0022http:\/\/purl.org\/rss\/1.0\/modules\/content\/\u0022\n xmlns:dc=\u0022http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/\u0022\n xmlns:foaf=\u0022http:\/\/xmlns.com\/foaf\/0.1\/\u0022\n xmlns:og=\u0022http:\/\/ogp.me\/ns#\u0022\n xmlns:rdfs=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/01\/rdf-schema#\u0022\n xmlns:sioc=\u0022http:\/\/rdfs.org\/sioc\/ns#\u0022\n xmlns:sioct=\u0022http:\/\/rdfs.org\/sioc\/types#\u0022\n xmlns:skos=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2004\/02\/skos\/core#\u0022\n xmlns:xsd=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2001\/XMLSchema#\u0022\n xmlns:mml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1998\/Math\/MathML\u0022\u003E\n \u003Chead\u003E\u003Cscript src=\u0022https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/sites\/default\/files\/js\/js_BLxotNs2yt7YGlf9QRI9L9AMfdnkQfnN-_ADBTW3SiE.js\u0022\u003E\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003Cscript src=\u0022https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/sites\/default\/files\/js\/js_HbE2XwzjmAgINxgddfJIkmp_TqZJiMR223hyz8f84-0.js\u0022\u003E\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003Cscript src=\u0022https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/sites\/default\/files\/js\/js_3AXG0LNnB7EfZpGscrFnEp_s68HSdbKCy6P9ARi1POA.js\u0022\u003E\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003Cscript src=\u0022https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/sites\/default\/files\/js\/js_5pJW4yfWseMttdpkEa-UN1BvAYqefcqhBP2vGBZv4Fs.js\u0022\u003E\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003Cscript\u003EjQuery.extend(Drupal.settings, {\u0022basePath\u0022:\u0022\\\/\u0022,\u0022pathPrefix\u0022:\u0022\u0022,\u0022chosen\u0022:{\u0022selector\u0022:\u0022select:visible\u0022,\u0022minimum_single\u0022:20,\u0022minimum_multiple\u0022:20,\u0022minimum_width\u0022:250,\u0022options\u0022:{\u0022disable_search\u0022:false,\u0022disable_search_threshold\u0022:0,\u0022search_contains\u0022:false,\u0022placeholder_text_multiple\u0022:\u0022Choose some options\u0022,\u0022placeholder_text_single\u0022:\u0022Choose an option\u0022,\u0022no_results_text\u0022:\u0022No results match\u0022,\u0022inherit_select_classes\u0022:true}},\u0022urlIsAjaxTrusted\u0022:{\u0022\\\/\u0022:true},\u0022views\u0022:{\u0022ajax_path\u0022:\u0022\\\/views\\\/ajax\u0022,\u0022ajaxViews\u0022:{\u0022views_dom_id:de63fedf6b49fddd70f9b9b248aabd3e\u0022:{\u0022view_name\u0022:\u0022bmj_rapid_responses\u0022,\u0022view_display_id\u0022:\u0022bmj_rr_article\u0022,\u0022view_args\u0022:\u0022548658\u0022,\u0022view_path\u0022:\u0022node\\\/548658\u0022,\u0022view_base_path\u0022:null,\u0022view_dom_id\u0022:\u0022de63fedf6b49fddd70f9b9b248aabd3e\u0022,\u0022pager_element\u0022:0}}},\u0022ajaxPageState\u0022:{\u0022jquery_version\u0022:\u00221.8\u0022,\u0022js\u0022:{\u0022sites\\\/all\\\/modules\\\/contrib\\\/jquery_update\\\/replace\\\/ui\\\/external\\\/jquery.cookie.js\u0022:1,\u0022sites\\\/all\\\/modules\\\/contrib\\\/jquery_update\\\/replace\\\/misc\\\/jquery.form.min.js\u0022:1,\u0022misc\\\/ajax.js\u0022:1,\u0022sites\\\/all\\\/modules\\\/contrib\\\/jquery_update\\\/js\\\/jquery_update.js\u0022:1,\u0022sites\\\/all\\\/libraries\\\/chosen\\\/chosen.jquery.min.js\u0022:1,\u0022sites\\\/all\\\/modules\\\/contrib\\\/views\\\/js\\\/base.js\u0022:1,\u0022sites\\\/all\\\/modules\\\/contrib\\\/views\\\/js\\\/ajax_view.js\u0022:1,\u0022sites\\\/all\\\/modules\\\/contrib\\\/chosen\\\/chosen.js\u0022:1,\u0022sites\\\/default\\\/themes\\\/bmj\\\/bootstrap\\\/js\\\/modules\\\/views\\\/js\\\/ajax_view.js\u0022:1}},\u0022bootstrap\u0022:{\u0022anchorsFix\u0022:\u00221\u0022,\u0022anchorsSmoothScrolling\u0022:\u00221\u0022,\u0022popoverEnabled\u0022:\u00221\u0022,\u0022popoverOptions\u0022:{\u0022animation\u0022:1,\u0022html\u0022:0,\u0022placement\u0022:\u0022right\u0022,\u0022selector\u0022:\u0022\u0022,\u0022trigger\u0022:\u0022click\u0022,\u0022title\u0022:\u0022\u0022,\u0022content\u0022:\u0022\u0022,\u0022delay\u0022:0,\u0022container\u0022:\u0022body\u0022},\u0022tooltipEnabled\u0022:\u00221\u0022,\u0022tooltipOptions\u0022:{\u0022animation\u0022:1,\u0022html\u0022:0,\u0022placement\u0022:\u0022auto left\u0022,\u0022selector\u0022:\u0022\u0022,\u0022trigger\u0022:\u0022hover focus\u0022,\u0022delay\u0022:0,\u0022container\u0022:\u0022body\u0022}}});\u003C\/script\u003E\n\u003Clink type=\u0022text\/css\u0022 rel=\u0022stylesheet\u0022 href=\u0022https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/sites\/default\/files\/advagg_css\/css__qi8YWDPFPT47Hua3Uo8V-CwYV79O8gYOw4xRshlFw2o__atYiVS2jy_a7eks45S24ISyI0mqmyzuvUeJ_hve5zAc__ZsgWiNzl8DMstPiYxPQ8bKb0o-xUU9pK7VK--2ZdEhg.css\u0022 media=\u0022all\u0022 \/\u003E\n\u003Clink type=\u0022text\/css\u0022 rel=\u0022stylesheet\u0022 href=\u0022https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/sites\/default\/files\/advagg_css\/css__dn-cpI1YtkU_iLHgA5WhlkxgYWyat_IxjF_B-WSYrpE__Ta9eNt7PPGHCfsyTneXg1ooQkRjbMt18zHVfHQYMDns__ZsgWiNzl8DMstPiYxPQ8bKb0o-xUU9pK7VK--2ZdEhg.css\u0022 media=\u0022all\u0022 \/\u003E\n\u003Clink type=\u0022text\/css\u0022 rel=\u0022stylesheet\u0022 href=\u0022https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/sites\/default\/files\/advagg_css\/css__-BkZ71IF4pBXmZfP4vYyswWdIhuaKktrUUQ4i2vtUVo__0i_0YcYkMECNn0z7FdhNoJ8gLWleqnTtjnHRAmLijvc__ZsgWiNzl8DMstPiYxPQ8bKb0o-xUU9pK7VK--2ZdEhg.css\u0022 media=\u0022all\u0022 \/\u003E\n\u003Clink rel=\u0027stylesheet\u0027 type=\u0027text\/css\u0027 href=\u0027\/sites\/all\/modules\/contrib\/panels\/plugins\/layouts\/onecol\/onecol.css\u0027 \/\u003E\u003C\/head\u003E\u003Cbody\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022panels-ajax-tab-panel panels-ajax-tab-panel-bmj-related-rapid-responses\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022panel-display panel-1col clearfix\u0022 \u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022panel-panel panel-col\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022panel-pane pane-views-panes pane-bmj-rapid-responses-bmj-rr-article\u0022 \u003E\n \n \u003Ch2 class=\u0022pane-title\u0022\u003EAll rapid responses\u003C\/h2\u003E\n \n \n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022pane-content\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022view view-bmj-rapid-responses view-id-bmj_rapid_responses view-display-id-bmj_rr_article view-dom-id-de63fedf6b49fddd70f9b9b248aabd3e\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022view-header\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv id=\u0022response-header-description\u0022\u003ERapid responses are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on thebmj.com. Although a selection of rapid responses will be included online and in print as readers\u0027 letters, their first appearance online means that they are published articles. If you need the url (web address) of an individual response, perhaps for citation purposes, simply click on the response headline and copy the url from the browser window. Letters are indexed in PubMed.\u003C\/div\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n \n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022view-filters\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cform action=\u0022\/\u0022 method=\u0022get\u0022 id=\u0022views-exposed-form-bmj-rapid-responses-bmj-rr-article\u0022 accept-charset=\u0022UTF-8\u0022\u003E\u003Cdiv\u003E\u003Cdiv class=\u0022views-exposed-form\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022views-exposed-widgets clearfix\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022views-exposed-widget views-widget-sort-by\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022form-type-select form-item-sort-by form-item form-group\u0022\u003E\n \u003Clabel for=\u0022edit-sort-by\u0022\u003ESort by \u003C\/label\u003E\n \u003Cselect class=\u0022form-control form-select\u0022 id=\u0022edit-sort-by\u0022 name=\u0022sort_by\u0022\u003E\u003Coption value=\u0022field_highwire_a_epubdate_value\u0022 selected=\u0022selected\u0022\u003EDate Published\u003C\/option\u003E\u003C\/select\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022views-exposed-widget views-widget-sort-order\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022form-type-select form-item-sort-order form-item form-group\u0022\u003E\n \u003Clabel for=\u0022edit-sort-order\u0022\u003EOrder \u003C\/label\u003E\n \u003Cselect class=\u0022form-control form-select\u0022 id=\u0022edit-sort-order\u0022 name=\u0022sort_order\u0022\u003E\u003Coption value=\u0022ASC\u0022\u003EAscending\u003C\/option\u003E\u003Coption value=\u0022DESC\u0022 selected=\u0022selected\u0022\u003EDescending\u003C\/option\u003E\u003C\/select\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022views-exposed-widget views-widget-per-page\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022form-type-select form-item-items-per-page form-item form-group\u0022\u003E\n \u003Clabel for=\u0022edit-items-per-page\u0022\u003EItems per page \u003C\/label\u003E\n \u003Cselect class=\u0022form-control form-select\u0022 id=\u0022edit-items-per-page\u0022 name=\u0022items_per_page\u0022\u003E\u003Coption value=\u00225\u0022\u003E5\u003C\/option\u003E\u003Coption value=\u002210\u0022 selected=\u0022selected\u0022\u003E10\u003C\/option\u003E\u003Coption value=\u002220\u0022\u003E20\u003C\/option\u003E\u003Coption value=\u002240\u0022\u003E40\u003C\/option\u003E\u003Coption value=\u002260\u0022\u003E60\u003C\/option\u003E\u003C\/select\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022views-exposed-widget views-submit-button\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cinput class=\u0022btn btn-info form-submit\u0022 type=\u0022submit\u0022 id=\u0022edit-submit-bmj-rapid-responses\u0022 name=\u0022\u0022 value=\u0022Apply\u0022 \/\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003C\/div\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/form\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n \n \n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022view-content\u0022\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first\u0022\u003E\n \r\n\u003Cdiv class=\u0022node node-highwire-comment clearfix\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022row rr-header\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022rr-left-column\u0022 class=\u0022\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-title\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Ca href=\u0022\/rapid-response\/2011\/10\/30\/smoking-cessation-devices-nicobloc-replies\u0022\u003E\u003Ch3\u003ESmoking cessation devices: NicoBloc replies\u003C\/h3\u003E\r\n \u003C\/a\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022content\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-body\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Cdiv xmlns:rsp=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Response\u0022 xmlns:nlm=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/NLM\/Journal\u0022 xmlns:msg=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Message\u0022 xmlns:c=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Compound\u0022 xmlns:x=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 xmlns:xs=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2001\/XMLSchema\u0022 xmlns:e=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/HPP\/Expand\u0022 xmlns:idx=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Index\u0022 xmlns:atom=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2005\/Atom\u0022 xmlns:frz=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Firenze\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 xmlns:openSearch=\u0022http:\/\/a9.com\/-\/spec\/opensearch\/1.1\/\u0022 xmlns:hpp=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Publishing\u0022 xmlns:app=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2007\/app\u0022 xmlns:fs=\u0022http:\/\/sassfs.highwire.org\/Service\/Content\u0022 xmlns:l=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Linking\u0022 xmlns:cache=\u0022http:\/\/sassfs.highwire.org\/Service\/Cache\u0022 xmlns:r=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Revision\u0022 xmlns:req=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Request\u0022 xmlns:hwp=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Journal\u0022 xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EAs the person who compiled the \u003Ci\u003ESummary of NicoBloc research\u003C\/i\u003E [1] (Bill King\u2019s ref. No. 2), I feel that there are some aspects of Bill King\u2019s criticisms which warrant clarification.\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n\u003Cp\/\u003E\n\u003Cul\u003E\n\u003Cli\u003EMachine smoking tests: \u003Ci\u003E\u2018The manufacturer accepts the favourable results and dismisses the others as unreliable\u2019\u003C\/i\u003E. There are three independent sets of results in existence [1]. Two of these are in close agreement, with tar and nicotine reductions in the 88\u201399% range. The third shows (tar) 20% and (nicotine) 30% reductions, the latter being insufficient to account for the physiological reductions in nicotine (60%) reported in the same paper [2], particularly as the main complaint is that in extrapolating from standard smoking machine tests to human smokers, humans tend to get more out of their cigarettes than the machines do. These latter results must, therefore, be treated with caution, and the balance of evidence is in favour of the two sets of results which broadly agree.\u003C\/li\u003E\n\u003C\/ul\u003E\n\u003Cp\/\u003E\n\u003Cul\u003E\n\u003Cli\u003E\u003Ci\u003E\u2018the \u0022up to 99%\u0022 figure is derived from the wrong test\u2019\u003C\/i\u003E (i) Tar: as there is no ready physiological measurement for tar derived from cigarettes by human smokers, smoking machines supply the only data available. (ii) Nicotine: the only physiological data currently published (see below) are the ~60% reductions reported in [2]; these are very encouraging in their own right in terms of the reduction in nicotine blood plasma boosts. However, the machine tests, which conform to ISO standards and are used by Government-appointed laboratories, determine the differences between brands of cigarettes in terms of nicotine and tar yield. Therefore the tests are valid for what they objectively measure which is the differences between NicoBloc-treated and -untreated cigarettes in tar and nicotine yield.\u003C\/li\u003E\n\u003C\/ul\u003E\n\u003Cp\/\u003E\n\u003Cul\u003E\n\u003Cli\u003E\u003Ci\u003E\u2018it would be interesting to know whether subjects reported this spontaneously or were cued\u2019\u003C\/i\u003E This point would have to be raised with the author of the study. However, these subjects\u2019 reports are in line with anecdotal reports from quitters using the Rosen Programme (a forerunner to NicoBloc).\u003C\/li\u003E\n\u003C\/ul\u003E\n\u003Cp\/\u003E\n\u003Cul\u003E\n\u003Cli\u003E\u003Ci\u003E\u2018if subjects could still taste anything at all when applying three drops, is it credible that their tar intakes were reduced by anywhere near 99%?\u2019\u003C\/i\u003E The only argument here is anecdotal, but a would-be quitter will be predisposed to find any quitting aid acceptable. Using NicoBloc, they begin with a single drop, which is far less drastic than three. It has been likened to reducing sugar in tea, or salt on food; the initial apparent change in taste is transient and quickly becomes acceptable. The relevant point is not whether there is any perceptible change in taste, but whether such change as is perceived can be tolerated and adjusted to. The anecdotal answer, from large numbers of Rosen Programme quitters, is \u2018yes\u2019. In this context, it is important to realise that the effectiveness of NicoBloc as a quitting aid rests on more than just the reduction in tar and nicotine inhaled. The behavioural modification, goal-setting and other aspects are important, too [3].\u003C\/li\u003E\n\u003C\/ul\u003E\n\u003Cp\/\u003E\n\u003Cul\u003E\n\u003Cli\u003E\u003Ci\u003E\u2018Tim Coleman (BMJ, Feb 14, p398) wrote: \u201cThe challenge for those who advocate complementary therapies in smoking cessation is to provide evidence for their effectiveness.\u201d . . . The product has been available for some years under various brand names but no clinical trials have been published\u2019\u003C\/i\u003E Ideally, research needs to be funded and carried out by people who do not stand to gain or lose by the result; furthermore, small companies cannot tie up the hundreds of thousands of pounds needed to fund even a single trial when the report will not be published for at least a couple of years. NicoBloc and any similar product faces an additional problem: what if it is exactly as effective as as Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT)? The Cochrane Review of NRT [4] found that over half the 110 trials reviewed failed to show a significant (95% confidence) benefit of NRT over no treatment. A company with a single product as effective as NRT thus runs a 50-50 chance that the first study published shows it to be ineffective, and could be commercially damaged as a result, and yet NRT, with the backing of the pharmaceutics industry, has survived and is now the pre-eminent quitting aid. NicoBloc has considerable documented evidence from the Rosen Programme of its effectiveness as a quitting aid, sufficient to encourage those who developed it to bring it to market as an over-the-counter product, but is dependent on the scientific community for research. On a positive note, there is one study using NicoBloc under way and another applying for funding; beyond offering encouragement, information and supplies of NicoBloc, the company has no involvement.\u003C\/li\u003E\n\u003C\/ul\u003E\n\u003Cp\/\u003E\n\u003Cul\u003E\n\u003Cli\u003E\u003Ci\u003E\u2018there is a need for new regulatory measures to help ensure that consumer choices between available therapies and products are not adversely affected by misinformation\u2019\u003C\/i\u003E The quality of consumer information is what matters here, however it is achieved. The previous point revealed an inherent problem for would-be quitters: a small company with a good product has a slimmer chance of commercial success than a huge company with one; the huge companies are the pharmaceuticals, so the commercially successful products are likely to be pharmaceutical, however good the other products are. Currently, those smokers for whom NRT is contraindicated (e.g. pregnant, diabetic, age-related macular degeneration) have little choice and less independent information. What all quitters need is greater and more informed choice about quitting aids; NicoBloc\u2019s own data from nearly 2000 respondents using NicoBloc indicate that more than two-thirds of them have failed to quit with NRT and are looking for something different to try. Surely it would be rational to spend public money on independent research into non-pharmaceutical quitting methods. A miniscule share of tobacco tax would fund a very useful range and number of studies.\u003C\/li\u003E\n\u003C\/ul\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EReferences\n\u003Cp\u003E[1] \u003Ca shape=\u0022rect\u0022 href=\u0022http:\/\/www.nicobloc.com\/Professionals\/professional_home.asp\u0022\u003Ehttp:\/\/www.nicobloc.com\/Professionals\/professional_home.asp\u003C\/a\u003E - Summary of NicoBloc research. Accessed 5 Mar 2004.\n\u003Cp\u003E[2] Pickworth, W.B., Fant, R.V., Nelson, R.A. and Henningfield, J.E. Effects of smoking through a partially occluded filter. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behaviour vol 60, no 4, pp817-21, 1998.\n\u003Cp\u003E[3] \u003Ca shape=\u0022rect\u0022 href=\u0022http:\/\/www.nicobloc.com\/Professionals\/professional_home.asp\u0022\u003Ehttp:\/\/www.nicobloc.com\/Professionals\/professional_home.asp\u003C\/a\u003E - Capital Doctor, \u0027NicoBloc, a new drug-free stop-smoking aid\u0027. Accessed 5 Mar 2004.\n\u003Cp\u003E[4] Silagy, C., Lancaster, T., Stead, L., Mant, D and Fowler, G. Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation (Cochrane Review). In: \u003Ci\u003EThe Cochrane Library\u003C\/i\u003E, Issue 1, 2004. Chichester, UK: John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons, Ltd. (amended 20 Aug 2002)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003ECompeting interests:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDr Alex Milne, is an independent consultant who was engaged by NicoBloc to summarise published scientific data and is replying on behalf of NicoBloc \u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-competing\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECompeting interests: \u003C\/strong\u003E\r\n No competing interests\u003C\/p\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022rr-right-column\u0022 class=\u0022\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-date\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Cstrong\u003E06 March 2004\u003C\/strong\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-author\u0022\u003E\r\n Alex R. Milne \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-occupation\u0022\u003E\r\n Freelance neuroscience copy editor; occasional consultant with special interest in smoking \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-other_authors\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-affiliation\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-address\u0022\u003E\r\n Woodside, High Onn, Stafford ST20 0AX, UK \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022twitter-address\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/twitter.com\/\u0022\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-links\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \r\n \r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022rr-separator\u0022 class=\u0022clearfix\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022light-grey-line\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n\u003C\/div\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022views-row views-row-2 views-row-even views-row-last\u0022\u003E\n \r\n\u003Cdiv class=\u0022node node-highwire-comment clearfix\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022row rr-header\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022rr-left-column\u0022 class=\u0022\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-title\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Ca href=\u0022\/rapid-response\/2011\/10\/30\/smoking-cessation-devices-does-lack-regulation-encourage-misleading-claims\u0022\u003E\u003Ch3\u003ESmoking cessation devices: does lack of regulation encourage misleading claims about evidence of effectiveness?\u003C\/h3\u003E\r\n \u003C\/a\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022content\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-body\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Cdiv xmlns:rsp=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Response\u0022 xmlns:nlm=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/NLM\/Journal\u0022 xmlns:msg=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Message\u0022 xmlns:c=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Compound\u0022 xmlns:x=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 xmlns:xs=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2001\/XMLSchema\u0022 xmlns:e=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/HPP\/Expand\u0022 xmlns:idx=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Index\u0022 xmlns:atom=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2005\/Atom\u0022 xmlns:frz=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Firenze\u0022 xmlns:xhtml=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022 xmlns:openSearch=\u0022http:\/\/a9.com\/-\/spec\/opensearch\/1.1\/\u0022 xmlns:hpp=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Publishing\u0022 xmlns:app=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2007\/app\u0022 xmlns:fs=\u0022http:\/\/sassfs.highwire.org\/Service\/Content\u0022 xmlns:l=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Linking\u0022 xmlns:cache=\u0022http:\/\/sassfs.highwire.org\/Service\/Cache\u0022 xmlns:r=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Revision\u0022 xmlns:req=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Service\/Request\u0022 xmlns:hwp=\u0022http:\/\/schema.highwire.org\/Journal\u0022 xmlns=\u0022http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/xhtml\u0022\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E Tim Coleman (BMJ, Feb 14, p398) wrote: \u201cThe challenge for those who\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nadvocate complementary therapies in smoking cessation is to provide\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nevidence for their effectiveness.\u201d One might add that advocates of these\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ntherapies have a responsibility to avoid making misleading claims about\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ncurrent evidence. A related matter is the potentially misleading promotion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nof some smoking cessation devices, which are not regulated as medicines or\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nmedical devices. An instructive case is NicoBloc, a smoking cessation\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ndevice currently marketed in the UK, Australia, Ireland and the US. The\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nproduct has been available for some years under various brand names but no\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nclinical trials have been published.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E NicoBloc is a corn syrup solution, applied to the filters of\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ncigarettes. Smokers are instructed to progress from applying one drop to\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nthree drops of the solution over a six-week period, then make a quit\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nattempt. NicoBloc has prima facie plausibility as way of making cigarettes\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nless rewarding to smoke. However, the manufacturer makes a very different\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nclaim: \u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E \u0022NicoBloc will be absorbing up to 99% of the tar and nicotine that\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nwould otherwise be entering your lungs each time you inhale without\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nsignificantly altering the taste or satisfaction of the cigarette.\u0022[1] \u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E What evidence is provided for these paired claims? The NicoBloc\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nwebsite reports smoking machine tests by Stillwell and Gladding\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nlaboratories, showing approximately 98% reductions in tar and nicotine\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nyields when Winston and Marlboro were treated with three drops of\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNicoBloc.[2] (These were standard yields \u2013 what a smoking machine\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ncollects when it takes a 35ml puff over 2 seconds, once per minute).\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nHowever, elsewhere in the \u201cProfessionals\u201d page, we find that a published\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nstudy reported 20% reductions in tar yield and 30% reductions in nicotine\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nyield when Marlboro full-flavor (16mg tar yield) was treated with three\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ndrops of the solution.[3] Because the Stillwell and Gladding tests were\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nalso conducted on 16mg Marlboro, these are strongly conflicting\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nresults.[4] The manufacturer accepts the favourable results and dismisses\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nthe others as unreliable. More importantly, standard machine smoking\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nyields are treated as a valid indicator of smokers\u2019 actual intakes,\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ndespite a strong expert consensus that yield figures are practically\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nuseless for this purpose. [5] That is, the \u0022up to 99%\u0022 figure is derived\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nfrom the wrong test. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E Interestingly, the published study included actual intake\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nmeasures.[3] It found a 60% reduction in mean nicotine boost when 19\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nsubjects smoked cigarettes treated with three drops on a once-off basis.\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nThe manufacturers could then have claimed that three drops of NicoBloc had\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nbeen demonstrated to produce intake reductions of \u201cup to 60%\u201d and at least\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nbeen referring to the right kind of test. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E Intake reductions approaching 99% would probably not be appealing to\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nmany smokers if accompanied by satisfaction reductions approaching 99%,\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nhence the motivation to claim that satisfaction is maintained. The\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n\u201cwithout significantly altering taste or satisfaction\u201d claim is apparently\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nbased on the fact that the reductions in taste and satisfaction reported\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nby the 19 subjects in the published study were not statistically\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nsignificant.[3] Also, a progress report on a six-week \u201cpreliminary open\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ntrial\u201d of NicoBloc\/ Accu Drop combined with motivational counselling, also\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nemploying 19 subjects, states: \u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E \u201cWith the exception of the three early drop outs, all participants\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nreported satisfaction and adherence to using the drops as prescribed\u2026\u201d\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nand\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n\u201cThe participants uniformly reported that while the drops affected the\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nstrength of their cigarette[s] they did not affect the taste of their\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ncigarettes.\u201d[6] \u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E Being satisfied with the process of using NicoBloc is not the same\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nas finding treated cigarettes satisfying to smoke so the first sentence\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ndoes not support the manufacturer\u2019s claim. The second sentence comes\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ncloser, although it would be interesting to know whether subjects reported\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nthis spontaneously or were cued. However, if subjects could still taste\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nanything at all when applying three drops, is it credible that their tar\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nintakes were reduced by anywhere near 99%?\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E The manufacturers of NicoBloc have been repeatedly informed that\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ntheir promotions are potentially misleading but appear impervious to the\u003Cbr \/\u003E\narguments. Unless Nicobloc is an isolated case, there is a need for new\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nregulatory measures to help ensure that consumer choices between available\u003Cbr \/\u003E\ntherapies and products are not adversely affected by misinformation.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E REFERENCES.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E1. \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/www.nicobloc.com\/using.htm\u0022\u003Ewww.nicobloc.com\/using.htm\u003C\/a\u003E Using NicoBloc. Accessed Feb 13, 2004. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E2. \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/www.nicobloc.com\/Professionals\/professional_home.asp\u0022\u003Ehttp:\/\/www.nicobloc.com\/Professionals\/professional_home.asp\u003C\/a\u003E Summary of\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNicoBloc research. Accessed Feb 13, 2004.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E3. Pickworth, W.B., Fant, R.V., Nelson, R.A. and Henningfield, J.E.\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nEffects of smoking through a partially occluded filter. Pharmacology,\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nBiochemistry and Behaviour vol 60, no 4, pp817-21, 1998.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E4. Stillwell and Gladding Testing Laboratories Report of Analysis document\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nprovided to The Cancer Council Australia by Rosen Holdings, Nov 10, 2003.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E5. National Cancer Institute. Risks Associated with Smoking Cigarettes\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nwith Low Machine-Measured yields of Tar and Nicotine. Smoking and Tobacco\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nControl Monograph No.13. Bethesda, MD: US Department of Health and Human\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nServices, 2001.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E6. Gariti, P. \u201cRE: Progress Report \u2013 Accu Drop.\u201d Jan 14, 1998. Document\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nprovided to The Cancer Council Australia by Rosen Holdings, Nov 10, 2003.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003ECompeting interests:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNone declared\u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-competing\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECompeting interests: \u003C\/strong\u003E\r\n No competing interests\u003C\/p\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022rr-right-column\u0022 class=\u0022\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-date\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Cstrong\u003E26 February 2004\u003C\/strong\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-author\u0022\u003E\r\n bill king \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-occupation\u0022\u003E\r\n research officer \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-other_authors\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-affiliation\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-address\u0022\u003E\r\n VicHealth Centre for Tobacco Control, Cancer Council Victoria, 100 Drummond St Carlton, Vic 3053 \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022twitter-address\u0022\u003E\r\n \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/twitter.com\/\u0022\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022response-links\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \r\n \r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022rr-separator\u0022 class=\u0022clearfix\u0022\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003Cdiv class=\u0022light-grey-line\u0022\u003E\u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\r\n\r\n\u003C\/div\u003E\r\n \u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003C\/div\u003E\n \n \n \n \n \n \n\u003C\/div\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n\n \n \u003C\/div\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\n \u003C\/div\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\n\u003C\/div\u003E\u003C\/body\u003E\u003C\/html\u003E"}